I’m getting a little sick of this bending over backwards to not appear “stupid” by these “high profile blogs” on the right. And unfortunately that must include Breitbart.com.

I’m not a “birther” either, in that, I don’t spend all of my time hunting down tips, leads, clues or evidence that Obama’s birth record, birth father, and life story is a lie. But I don’t ridicule the people who do that work.

How can Breitbart.com simultaneously say, we have a document that says Obama was born in Kenya, produced by Obama’s agents, and the printer says that the information was “probably” verified by the authors themselves, but then say that this doesn’t, at all, put the birth certificate’s veracity into question? Why is that?

What’s the Obama explanation? He was lying when he said he was born in Kenya? Well, if he’s a liar why are you choosing to believe the claim that he was born in Hawaii? Because it makes you look sophisticated at cocktail parties?

Question:

How the hell did the literary agent get the false information that his client was born in Kenya? That’s not something you just “make an oopsie daisy” about. That’s something you would want to verify with your client before publishing.

You know why this “vetting” by Breitbart.com is not getting any traction? Because it has absolutely ZERO TESTOSTERONE behind it, and it shows by the way the editors are crafting these stories. There’s something oddly distant about them. They are way too passive in their presentation. If you got something, sell it.

Also, Breitbart might not have been a birther, but he sure as hell could have “evolved” into one when more and more evidence began piling up. I would stop speaking for him at this point.

Editors: There is no need to put a virtual disclaimer on everything that is uncovered by Breitbart.com, is there?

***

And this from AJ, investigative reporter:

All those “disclaimers” on the Breitbart article were kind of pathetic…just put it out there and let it speak for itself…